Literally just minutes ago, I was thinking about this topic (& in particular the astounding prophecy of Jesus in the book of Wisdom, & that I should share it with my Protestant friend, who may have not heard it before)… then, I went to TH-cam, & is the first video that popped up in my feed, without even searching the topic! I’ll have to send her this video! Thank you!
Excellent. I was amazed the first time I read the book of wisdom as a Protestant. I thought to myself, “why did we ever get rid of this?” I think the answer is because that was the price we had to pay to get rid of Tobit and II Maccabees - because they’re so Catholic
I don't think that's right. The Holy Spirit will never confuse his people. He leads every believer in all truth. So don't say God told you. You may have had something liked like Mary worship, Jesus becomes alive, and what not.
@anuradhakadam7907 You say the Holy Spirit "leads every believer in all truth". That is nonsense, bcoz Protestants have different opinions on what "truth" is, based on different interpretations of the Bible. That's why there are thousands of different Protestant "churches". Jesus founded just one Church - the Catholic Church - which decides what "all truth" (John 16:13) is. Protestantism isn't the truth; it's fake Christianity.
@anuradhakadam7907 You say the Holy Spirit "leads every believer in all truth". That is nonsesnse, bcoz Protestants can't agree on what "all truth" is, due to different interpretations of the Bible. That's why there are thousands of different Protestant "churches". Jesus founded just one Church - the Catholic Church - which decides what "all truth" is (John 16:13). Protestantism isn't the truth; it's fake Christianity that creates confusion and disunity and false doctrines.
I plan on doing a Bible study on the Deuterocanonical books near the end of the month and Eternal Christendom has greatly helped educate me and plan them out! Thanks for all of the great resources and content!
Here’s another example for you. Please see the prophecy from Wisdom 18:14-15 used as the Introit on the Sunday within the Octave of the Nativity of the Lord: "While all things were in quiet silence, and the night was in the midst of her course, Your Almighty Word, O Lord, leapt down from heaven, from Your royal throne."
@@po18guy-s4s Exactly, the old testament is an image of the revelation of Jesus, in the case of the pharaoh murdering children of the people of Israel to image the massacre of the innocent saints committed by Herod, as well as Joseph the so;adorer to image the dream of Joseph husband of the Virgin and his mission, Joseph in the old testament thanks to the revelations received in the dreams; In the old testament thanks to the revelations received in the dreams of the pharaoh he manages to take Isarael out of the desert to save him from death (the famine) in the same way Joseph husband of Mary through a dream, an angel of the Lord reveals to him what he has to do and in this way saves Jesus (Israel) from death by taking him to Egypt. these prefigurations of the life of jesus are all over the old estament.
St. John Bosco saw many quotations of Scripture in his dreams, and verses from Wisdom and Sirach were plenty! While certainly not "proof" to skeptics, he was such a great (and recent) saint that, as a faithful Catholic, it puts my mind at ease regarding the Deuterocanon.
Wisdom 2:12-24 - yes, this DID 'come to past' - therefore cannot be ignored. Great presentation - this is a SLAM DUNK for the book of Wisdom, and . . .
Those 7 Holy Books are some of my favorite in the whole Bible, priceless! Thank you for bringing this to my attention... how did we miss this?!? You definitely earned the like & sub👍
The Protestant biblical canon is a 2nd century (at the earliest) Jewish anti-Christian canon that rejected the Deuteros simultaneously with and along with the New Testament: "The Gospels and heretical books do not defile the hands. The books of Ben Sira [Sirach] and all other books written from then on do not defile the hands." - Tosefta Yadayim 2
When i was agnostic, i was wondering, why some christians used a list based on an jewish group list that excluded 27 books + 7 books, even aware of the "sect of the nazarene"... who else would be?
Just subscribed in anticipation. I have a few very sincere protestant friends. Somehow, instead of (or maybe because of) reading only bible and resistance to any pope, saint or doctor of the church, are fully convinced Catholic Church is wrong. I believe they have never heard the *proper* and detailed counter-arguments. They only hear what their "pastors" teach. This is like a vegan refusing to listen to anyone who says "some amino acids are only found in meat"!
I've gotten a few years of experience discussing different things with Protestants and there are only two things worth discussing, because all other topics are results of these two: "What is the Bible?" and "What is Worship?" If you focus on "What is the Bible?", "Where did you get it?", "How do we know it contains the correct writings?", etc. the protestant epistemology is very quickly shown to be backwards.
I was just listening to Joe Rogan interview Wes Huff and although it was a good interview Wess says there is 66 books in the Bible 😏he seems pretty intelligent hopefully he comes all the way home to the catholic church 🙏
Here's a start: PETER as Shepherd and first Pope: Scriptural evidence and the structure of the primitive Church make it absolutely undeniable that Christ chose Peter and that Peter was first among the twelve. Depending on the translation, Peter is mentioned 195 times. The closest is John (the beloved disciple) at just 29 times. The rest even less. Consider: Jesus entered Peter’s house. (Matthew 8:14) Jesus changed Simon's name to Peter. (John 1:42) Jesus gave Peter the keys to the gates of Heaven. (Matthew 16:19) Jesus declared Peter to the the rock. (Matthew 16:18) Jesus made Peter shepherd. (John 21:15-17) Jesus told Peter to strengthen his brothers (Luke 22:32) Jesus paid the Temple tax only for Himself and Peter. (Matthew 17:24-27) Jesus preached from Peter's boat. (Luke 5:3) Jesus told Peter to "Follow me" (John 21:19) Jesus called only Peter to walk on the water. (Matthew 14:29) Jesus predicted Peter's three-fold denial. (Matthew 26:34) Jesus predicted Peter's repentance and three-fold affirmation. (Luke 22:32) Jesus prophesied only Peter's manner of death. (John 21:18-19) Jesus taught Peter forgiveness 70 times 7 times. (Matthew 18:21-22) Jesus spoke only to Peter at Gethsemane. (Mark 14:37) Peter is always listed first of the Apostles. (Matthew 10:2, Luke 6:14, Acts 1:13) Peter was first to confess Jesus as Messiah. (Matthew 16:18) Peter alone spoke at the Transfiguration. (Matthew 17:4, Mark 9:5, Luke 9:33) Peter pointed out the withered fig tree. (Mark 11:21) Peter entered the tomb first - John deferring to him. (Luke 24:12, John 20:3-4)) Jesus, after resurrecting, appeared FIRST to Peter, then to the twelve. (1 Corinthians 15:5) Peter was the only apostle to confess that he was a sinner. (Luke 5:8) Peter decided the manner of replacing Judas. (Acts 1:15-26) Peter spoke for the eleven at the Pentecost. (Acts 2:14-36) Peter was released from prison by the Angel. (Acts 12:6-11) Peter spoke for the eleven before the Council. (Acts 4:8-12) Peter held sin bound to Ananias and Sapphira. (Acts 5:1-10) Peter's shadow healed. (Acts 5:15) Peter declared the sin of Simony. (Acts 8:18-23) Peter revealed the salvation of Gentiles to the Church at Jerusalem. (Acts 11:1-18) The Angel told Cornelius to call for Peter. (Acts 10:3-8) The Holy Spirit fell upon the Gentiles as Peter preached to them. (Acts 10:44-45) At the empty tomb, the Angel said, "Go tell His disciples, and Peter." (Mark 16:7) Mary Magdalene ran to tell Peter and the beloved disciple. (John 20:2) The vision of all foods being clean was given only to Peter. (Acts 10:9-16) Peter's words silence the first council in Jerusalem. (Acts 15:7-12) Paul went to Peter to affirm that his Gospel was not in vain. (Galatians 1:18) Peter was given the revelation of the end of the world. (2 Peter 3:10-11) Peter taught that Paul’s words were easily twisted. (2 Peter 3:16) Peter taught that baptism now saves you (1 Peter 3:21) And many other references. One may deny that Peter was primary, but it takes an amazing ignorance or denial of scripture and history to do so.
I’m new to the ancient forms of the faith but been reading these debated books. I loved Tobit ! It’s so edifying and I felt the spirit when I read it. Judith, not so much. Felt it was uninspired but I’m no authority on these things. I have been reading Sirac and it’s inspiring for sure
As with Psalm 22, do you think Jesus was referencing Wisdom 2 and the folly of his Enemies when he says “Father forgive them for they know not what they do.”
I would understand going with the Jewish canon if it were established before Christianity, but the fact that it was decided after the birth of Christianity should make one question why the deuterocanonical books were rejected by the Jews. How could their opposition to the new religion not have influenced which books they decided not to include?
Those quotes from Wisdom indeed were refering to Jesus... I was not found on those passages, i confess, i am a recent reconverted from Agnosticism, and this is new to me.
As a Catholic, I kept getting this video recommended in my feed but I kept avoiding it because I read the word Apocrypha and assumed this video and channel was Protestant. Then I noticed apocrypha was in quotations so I clicked on it out of curiosity and witnessed the thoroughly Catholic introduction haha 😂.
Aside from the Messianic prophecy, in my mind the reference in verse chapter 2:10 to the Righteous Poor Man, the widow and the grey hairs of old age perfectly describes the holy Family. Mary was certainly a widow in the end, and Joseph was believed to have been considerably older than Mary. We suspect this as Joseph received messages in dreams. As the Prophet Joel wrote (Joel 2:28): "And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit on all flesh; your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, and your young men shall see visions." As an aside, Fr. Kenneth Baker, S.J. author of "Inside he Bible" believes that Wisdom of Solomon "may" have been written as late as 50 BC.
Kjv66 is 2nd hand anteChrist book without the Deutero 7books. Book of Wisdom Charter 2 :14-24 filled with messiahnic Prophecy for a Jesus ( talks about Jews,Jesus&Father) if you are a true believer you must have 7books
I heard Luther kept them in his own copy of the Bible. We prefer to call them "Deuterocanonical Books". Apocryphal books would only include the non-canonical gnostic ones for Catholics.
Joshua TCharles, I have seen how the mercy and grace of God has allowed you to reveal what I myself also experienced in my time with Calvinism. We were misled by the British Bible Societies, and this was a mistake. Because, like you, I realized that the books we commonly call apocryphal were not so for the early Christians, especially the Book of Wisdom, which is clearly a canonical book far from being apocryphal. Just as God revealed to Simon that Jesus was His Son, He has now revealed this important and transcendental truth to you. Here I want to help you with some verses cited by the first Christians of the first 5 centuries, at least 20 citations from them, taken from the deuterocanonicals. This shows us that Martin Luther, without being part of any Church council, declared the seven deuterocanonical books to be apocryphal. The same Bishop Saint Augustine of Hippo, in the last council, selected 73 books, and for him the deuterocanonicals were canonical, just as you have realized that Wisdom is not apocryphal. I give glory to God, and perhaps this will help you see that only Luther believed this absurdity that they were apocryphal. Here are the citations from the first centuries regarding the deuterocanonicals, always believed by the early Church. I congratulate you for sharing your enlightenment with the other brothers. Example: Bring the quotes from at least 20 Church Fathers of the first centuries Name of the Apostolic Father, year of the letter or book, title of the letter or book, and the quote referencing the deuterocanonicals. Paragraph with Examples of Early Church Father Citations: Joshua TCharles, your journey of discovery regarding the deuterocanonical books is truly inspiring and resonates with the experiences of many who have examined the historical evidence. The notion of these books being "apocryphal" is a relatively late development, as we see clear evidence of their use and acceptance by the early Church. Martin Luther’s rejection of these texts stands in stark contrast to the consensus of the first centuries, where these books were not seen as extra-biblical, but as part of the scriptural tradition. As you've eloquently recognized the canonical nature of Wisdom, let us delve into some examples from the early Church Fathers supporting this point of view and the other deuterocanonical books: Clement of Rome, circa 96 AD, Letter to the Corinthians, Clement quotes from Wisdom 12:12: "Who can say to you, What have you done?" and presents it as authoritative. Polycarp of Smyrna, circa 110 AD, Letter to the Philippians, This letter alludes to Tobit 4:10, "Almsgiving delivers from death," reflecting a familiar understanding of these texts. Didache, circa 100-150 AD, Didache, The Didache is a manual of Christian life which shows familiarity with Sirach, quoting phrases and using concepts found in the book. There are a number of passages throughout the Didache that have parallels with Sirach. Irenaeus of Lyons, circa 180 AD, Against Heresies, Irenaeus uses Baruch 4:36-37 as an authority to refute the Gnostics idea of the physical world. Tertullian,circa 200 AD, On Modesty, explicitly quotes Wisdom to show its authority Clement of Alexandria, circa 200 AD, The Instructor, Clement often quotes from Baruch and Wisdom as scripture, showing a high regard for the books. He also mentions Tobit and Judith. Origen of Alexandria, circa 230 AD, Commentary on Matthew, Origen cites Wisdom 10:4 showing its acceptance as divinely inspired text when mentioning Noah. Cyprian of Carthage, circa 250 AD, Treatise 1, Cyprian quotes Tobit 12:8, "Prayer is good with fasting, and alms," using it as an authoritative piece of God's teaching. Hippolytus of Rome, circa 225 AD, Commentary on Daniel, Hippolytus quotes from Susanna as part of the Old Testament Scripture in his commentary. Athanasius of Alexandria, circa 367 AD, 39th Festal Letter acknowledges the usefulness of several deuterocanonical books, for edification, but places them in a category different than the protocanonical writings. Hilary of Poitiers, circa 360 AD, Commentary on the Psalms, Hilary quotes and accepts Baruch as part of the prophetic books. Cyril of Jerusalem, circa 350 AD, Catechetical Lectures, Cyril quotes from Wisdom and other deuterocanonical texts. Ambrose of Milan, circa 380 AD, On Repentance, Ambrose uses Tobit and Wisdom for instruction, seeing them as part of the inspired scriptures. Basil of Caesarea, circa 370 AD, Letters, Basil cites the book of Baruch. Gregory of Nyssa, circa 380 AD, On the Making of Man, Gregory quotes Wisdom as an authoritative text. John Chrysostom, circa 400 AD, Homilies on Hebrews, John references to the deuterocanonical book of Tobit. Epiphanius of Salamis, circa 375 AD, Panarion, Epiphanius mentions the book of Judith, in his discussion of the biblical canon. Augustine of Hippo, circa 400 AD, On Christian Doctrine, Augustine affirms the canonicity of the deuterocanonical books, including Wisdom, and Tobit, as part of the Old Testament canon in the council of Carthage which he attended. Jerome, circa 400 AD, Against Rufinus, Jerome shows familiarity with Tobit, Judith, Baruch and Wisdom as books included in the Old Testament canon. Council of Hippo circa 393 AD, This Council, where St. Augustine was involved, officially listed the Deuterocanonical books as part of the Old Testament canon for the church. These examples showcase that the deuterocanonical books were not peripheral or late additions, but integral parts of the scriptural tradition for centuries, long before the Reformation. These citations of early church fathers highlight the wide acceptance of these texts from the first centuries of Christianity. Your recognition of the canonical value of these books is a return to the authentic, historical understanding of the Christian scriptures.
The Apocrypha DOES repeat some of the actual Old Testament, so, in that regard, it has SOME truths in it. It ALSO has falsehoods. And once it contains a falsehood, it's no longer the Word of God. It is written AFTER the Old Testament is completed...every prophecy recorded, etc. in the period of Silence. It's not canon and to pretend otherwise is false teaching...and ADDING to God's Word in this manner comes with a hefty penalty.
How can the Roman Catholics who are ESAU'S seed who God hates, ( Malachi 1:2-3, Romans 9:13) decides what is or isn't the words of the God of Abraham Issac & Jacob?
Why is the Book of Wisdom not in the Bible? The Book of Wisdom is not in the Protestant Bible nor the Jewish holy books because it is not perceived to have been inspired by God, but the creation of humankind. The Book of Wisdom is one of the fourteen books of the Apocrypha which were all originally written in Greek and part of the Greek Old Testament. One of the basic principles of biblical interpretation is the analogia scriptura, the analogy of Scripture--we must compare Scripture with Scripture in order to understand its full and proper sense. Since the Bible doesn't contradict itself, any interpretation of a specific passage that contradicts the general teaching of the Bible is to be rejected.
*But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.* *Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.* *But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.* *And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.*
If you don’t accept the 73 book canon, would that mean your deny tradition? SOLO scriptura? -- and if you deny the 73 book canon, do you deny Jesus’ promise to guide the church into all truths?
There's an online christian ministry that's targeted to evangelize Jews, and ofc they're protestants, and never miss to bash Catholics from time to time. Anyways, they often use Isaiah to convince Jews about this prophecy. So what does this mean? Not all protestants reject Isaiah as divinely inspired, or what?
I'm a Catholic. The book of Wisdom was not written centuries before Christ It is dated to the mid first century BC. So more like 50 years before Christ.
22:30 i think you meant Psalm 72. You said Psalm 73 but started praying Psalm 72 ( unless you were praying from a protestant "bible". If so then I apologize). +CHRISTVS REX EST 👑
The apocryphal books in the Septuagint were in the KJV for hundreds of years. They were removed in the 1880s. It was very controversial. It is not a sin to read the apocryphal books. Protestants can read them. I don't care if those books are in my Bible or not. Those books don't make a person "not protestant." How many Protestants alive today were alive in the 1880s? None. Few Protestants have read those books. They reject them because they are told to. There's no poison in the apocryphal books that will suddenly make you a Roman Catholic.
Its all very well having a prophecy that is accurate in a book. And surely, that had a spiritual source. But the rest of the book of Wisdom has some weird ideas. These ideas have never grown into any doctrine but, in the wrong hands, they could. That's why the book was rejected. Ecclesiasticus is even worse. It says you should divorce your wife if she nags too much and that you should not fear death because you won't be judged among other peculiar sayings. Its very obviously human. Its like a father's advice to his son. But scripture? No way! Lots of Christians have prophesied things throughout the ages that came true. Must their writings now become part of the new testament? The Jews had already rejected these books. Why should Christians now accept them? These arguments about the cannon go on and on. But the books of the bible were established centuries ago for very good reasons by the fathers of our faith. I really think it is a bad idea to continually buck up against this pillar of truth.
To claim what is "scripture" I believe a large part is man made, so imo you need way better reasons to deny reading these books, it's just egotistical to not
The history of protestantism leaves one good lesson: Do not pay attention to protestants when they speak about the Canon, because protestantism began with a clear attack against the canon of the Bible: luther took out of the Bible 7 Books of the OT and 4 of the NT and other protestant follow him, read "The Canon of the NT" by protestant NT Scholar Bruce Metzger for a list of early protestants reformers who rejected Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, Jude and Revelation as God´s Word and called or treat them "apocrypha". This is why the Council of Trent in 1546 had to teach once again what is the real canon of the Bible.
I listened to Joshua's presentation and how many times Isiah is quoted relative to Wisdom is the not the point I think he was trying to make. I think you would acknowledge that in the 39 book OT Canon protestants hold to (Catholics hold those same 39 as canonical as well) that Judges, Ruth, Ezra, Esther, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Lamentations, Obadiah, Jonah, and Zephaniah are never directly quoted. Some are alluded to clearly, the sign of Jonah is clearly referencing the book of Jonah by Christ in MT 16:4 but at the same time some of those are not even alluded to and 2 (Esther and Song of Songs) do not even mention God. Cheers.
@PalermoTrapani l think the Jewish rabbi's have different view of their scripture, especially Isaiah chapter 53, again they consider the Masoretic text more than the Septuagint. The myth of the 70 or 72 Jewish scholars in Alexandria with same results is far fetched. The old testament writings are a mix of languages from other sources besides the Hebrew,which in Moses day was so different from the Masoretic text having vowel pointing. As apostle Paul said himself,the letter killeth,the spirit giveth Life, you can debate over which is the best transliteration,yet what does it prove??, jesus on the road to Emmaus had to explain that the scripture was fulfilled in him, Peter in Matthew chapter 16, never got his revelation from his biblical knowledge or jesus in the flesh. Jesus said clearly his father in heaven revealed him,John the baptist had same revelation prior to Peter.. . lastly l think it's about predestination of God himself who gave jesus his disciples, jesus said same in gospel of John chapter 17. Jesus said also to his disciples, l have chosen you,not you choose me,that's very revealing with John gospel chapter 17.
@@frederickanderson1860 No the Masoretic text was put together well after the time of Christ and the early Church. The Apostles and the Christians considered the LXX more important as the OT quotes cited in the NT are about 75% from the LXX, Saint Paul it is like 95% of the time (13 or 14 of the 27 books in the NT canon are attributed to Saint Paul). Cheers.
@PalermoTrapani yes but again predestination is the key to salvation, and am not a Calvinist or hyper Calvinist. Gospel of John chapter 17 jesus plainly states his father for choosing his disciples, and that they always acknowledge that to be one,as he and his father are one. The antichrist spirit is against the father and son.
@@frederickanderson1860 Predestination is orthodox if not kept in isolation and not put against God's Will which is perfect thus includes what God wills positively and what is in His permissive will, His perfect foreknowledge and also man's free response to God's invitation of Grace and in no circumstances can one hold to any idea that God eternally decrees someone (predestines) them to hell.
@@po18guy-s4sThat would be a valid response. But as a seeker of truth, it would be worth reading into it. Look at what the Bible says. And then decide.
I’d say it is a false prophecy made by twisted interpretation of a disturbed mind, among many invented by the devil - the father of lies and his soldiers. Protestantism has so many of those among its representatives, unfortunately.
The Protestant biblical canon is a 2nd century (at the earliest) anti-Christian Jewish canon that rejected the Deuteros simultaneously with and along with the New Testament: "The Gospels and heretical books do not defile the hands. The books of Ben Sira [Sirach] and all other books written from then on do not defile the hands." - Tosefta Yadayim 2
Literally just minutes ago, I was thinking about this topic (& in particular the astounding prophecy of Jesus in the book of Wisdom, & that I should share it with my Protestant friend, who may have not heard it before)… then, I went to TH-cam, & is the first video that popped up in my feed, without even searching the topic! I’ll have to send her this video! Thank you!
Same lol
Excellent. I was amazed the first time I read the book of wisdom as a Protestant. I thought to myself, “why did we ever get rid of this?” I think the answer is because that was the price we had to pay to get rid of Tobit and II Maccabees - because they’re so Catholic
🤣🤣🤣
@what does it being written in the 1st century BC have anything to do with it being canon or not?
@@Jason_615yes explain why the date matters
I was a Protestant until the Holy Spirit showed me that Christianity is the Catholic Church
Welcome home.😊
I don't think that's right.
The Holy Spirit will never confuse his people.
He leads every believer in all truth.
So don't say God told you. You may have had something liked like Mary worship, Jesus becomes alive, and what not.
@@anuradhakadam7907 Mary worship?
@anuradhakadam7907 You say the Holy Spirit "leads every believer in all truth". That is nonsense, bcoz Protestants have different opinions on what "truth" is, based on different interpretations of the Bible. That's why there are thousands of different Protestant "churches".
Jesus founded just one Church - the Catholic Church - which decides what "all truth" (John 16:13) is.
Protestantism isn't the truth; it's fake Christianity.
@anuradhakadam7907 You say the Holy Spirit "leads every believer in all truth". That is nonsesnse, bcoz Protestants can't agree on what "all truth" is, due to different interpretations of the Bible. That's why there are thousands of different Protestant "churches".
Jesus founded just one Church - the Catholic Church - which decides what "all truth" is (John 16:13).
Protestantism isn't the truth; it's fake Christianity that creates confusion and disunity and false doctrines.
As a Protestant, this was truly amazing!
I plan on doing a Bible study on the Deuterocanonical books near the end of the month and Eternal Christendom has greatly helped educate me and plan them out! Thanks for all of the great resources and content!
Here’s another example for you. Please see the prophecy from Wisdom 18:14-15 used as the Introit on the Sunday within the Octave of the Nativity of the Lord:
"While all things were in quiet silence, and the night was in the midst of her course, Your Almighty Word, O Lord, leapt down from heaven, from Your royal throne."
Wow.
Wisdom 18 is relating the Exodus, but the slaughter of the children is a 'type' of the holy innocents (Matthew 2:16).
@@po18guy-s4s Exactly, the old testament is an image of the revelation of Jesus, in the case of the pharaoh murdering children of the people of Israel to image the massacre of the innocent saints committed by Herod, as well as Joseph the so;adorer to image the dream of Joseph husband of the Virgin and his mission, Joseph in the old testament thanks to the revelations received in the dreams; In the old testament thanks to the revelations received in the dreams of the pharaoh he manages to take Isarael out of the desert to save him from death (the famine) in the same way Joseph husband of Mary through a dream, an angel of the Lord reveals to him what he has to do and in this way saves Jesus (Israel) from death by taking him to Egypt.
these prefigurations of the life of jesus are all over the old estament.
*Who will tell my Lord? The Lord himself, the Lord hears me.*
St. John Bosco saw many quotations of Scripture in his dreams, and verses from Wisdom and Sirach were plenty! While certainly not "proof" to skeptics, he was such a great (and recent) saint that, as a faithful Catholic, it puts my mind at ease regarding the Deuterocanon.
Wisdom 2:12-24 - yes, this DID 'come to past' - therefore cannot be ignored. Great presentation - this is a SLAM DUNK for the book of Wisdom, and . . .
I’m not even Catholic and the prophecy in wisdom 2 I would say is even more powerful than Isaiah 53
On par with Psalm 22.
This channel is a rich man’s Catholic answers.
Those 7 Holy Books are some of my favorite in the whole Bible, priceless! Thank you for bringing this to my attention... how did we miss this?!? You definitely earned the like & sub👍
It is a remarkable prophesy and more detailed that Isaiah 53 on the ministry of Jesus.
Everyone go check out Apocrypha Apocalypse for more!
Protestant here, this was awesome. Definitely going to consider treating the book of wisdom as inspired scripture
The Protestant biblical canon is a 2nd century (at the earliest) Jewish anti-Christian canon that rejected the Deuteros simultaneously with and along with the New Testament: "The Gospels and heretical books do not defile the hands. The books of Ben Sira [Sirach] and all other books written from then on do not defile the hands." - Tosefta Yadayim 2
When i was agnostic, i was wondering, why some christians used a list based on an jewish group list that excluded 27 books + 7 books, even aware of the "sect of the nazarene"... who else would be?
Hope you get a lot of Subs. Video is well done. Editing is great!
Just subscribed in anticipation. I have a few very sincere protestant friends. Somehow, instead of (or maybe because of) reading only bible and resistance to any pope, saint or doctor of the church, are fully convinced Catholic Church is wrong. I believe they have never heard the *proper* and detailed counter-arguments. They only hear what their "pastors" teach. This is like a vegan refusing to listen to anyone who says "some amino acids are only found in meat"!
I've gotten a few years of experience discussing different things with Protestants and there are only two things worth discussing, because all other topics are results of these two: "What is the Bible?" and "What is Worship?" If you focus on "What is the Bible?", "Where did you get it?", "How do we know it contains the correct writings?", etc. the protestant epistemology is very quickly shown to be backwards.
Pray for them. Then pray some more. And after that...prayer.
I have the same thoughts and feelings on Wisdom 2 compared to Isaiah 53. I always show it to my Protestant friends.
Wow, what a great video. Surprised this channel isn’t huge.
Matter of time. Josh Charles is great
Well done Joshua. Thank you.
I was just listening to Joe Rogan interview Wes Huff and although it was a good interview Wess says there is 66 books in the Bible 😏he seems pretty intelligent hopefully he comes all the way home to the catholic church 🙏
As a guy who's whole career is on early church manuscripts if he believed they were scripture of equal value he would have by now.
Ego can overrule intellect.
Especially when he calls him self an orthodox Christian.
@@JuanGonzalez-kb3gm But how on earth to define that?
Thank you. I’m a new Catholic who is sometimes struggling Protestant misconceptions. This really helps.
I just shared this passage with my wife yesterday!
Great videos If you could do more on the papacy would be excellent too
Here's a start: PETER as Shepherd and first Pope: Scriptural evidence and the structure of the primitive Church make it absolutely undeniable that Christ chose Peter and that Peter was first among the twelve. Depending on the translation, Peter is mentioned 195 times. The closest is John (the beloved disciple) at just 29 times. The rest even less. Consider:
Jesus entered Peter’s house. (Matthew 8:14)
Jesus changed Simon's name to Peter. (John 1:42)
Jesus gave Peter the keys to the gates of Heaven. (Matthew 16:19)
Jesus declared Peter to the the rock. (Matthew 16:18)
Jesus made Peter shepherd. (John 21:15-17)
Jesus told Peter to strengthen his brothers (Luke 22:32)
Jesus paid the Temple tax only for Himself and Peter. (Matthew 17:24-27)
Jesus preached from Peter's boat. (Luke 5:3)
Jesus told Peter to "Follow me" (John 21:19)
Jesus called only Peter to walk on the water. (Matthew 14:29)
Jesus predicted Peter's three-fold denial. (Matthew 26:34)
Jesus predicted Peter's repentance and three-fold affirmation. (Luke 22:32)
Jesus prophesied only Peter's manner of death. (John 21:18-19)
Jesus taught Peter forgiveness 70 times 7 times. (Matthew 18:21-22)
Jesus spoke only to Peter at Gethsemane. (Mark 14:37)
Peter is always listed first of the Apostles. (Matthew 10:2, Luke 6:14, Acts 1:13)
Peter was first to confess Jesus as Messiah. (Matthew 16:18)
Peter alone spoke at the Transfiguration. (Matthew 17:4, Mark 9:5, Luke 9:33)
Peter pointed out the withered fig tree. (Mark 11:21)
Peter entered the tomb first - John deferring to him. (Luke 24:12, John 20:3-4))
Jesus, after resurrecting, appeared FIRST to Peter, then to the twelve. (1 Corinthians 15:5)
Peter was the only apostle to confess that he was a sinner. (Luke 5:8)
Peter decided the manner of replacing Judas. (Acts 1:15-26)
Peter spoke for the eleven at the Pentecost. (Acts 2:14-36)
Peter was released from prison by the Angel. (Acts 12:6-11)
Peter spoke for the eleven before the Council. (Acts 4:8-12)
Peter held sin bound to Ananias and Sapphira. (Acts 5:1-10)
Peter's shadow healed. (Acts 5:15)
Peter declared the sin of Simony. (Acts 8:18-23)
Peter revealed the salvation of Gentiles to the Church at Jerusalem. (Acts 11:1-18)
The Angel told Cornelius to call for Peter. (Acts 10:3-8)
The Holy Spirit fell upon the Gentiles as Peter preached to them. (Acts 10:44-45)
At the empty tomb, the Angel said, "Go tell His disciples, and Peter." (Mark 16:7)
Mary Magdalene ran to tell Peter and the beloved disciple. (John 20:2)
The vision of all foods being clean was given only to Peter. (Acts 10:9-16)
Peter's words silence the first council in Jerusalem. (Acts 15:7-12)
Paul went to Peter to affirm that his Gospel was not in vain. (Galatians 1:18)
Peter was given the revelation of the end of the world. (2 Peter 3:10-11)
Peter taught that Paul’s words were easily twisted. (2 Peter 3:16)
Peter taught that baptism now saves you (1 Peter 3:21)
And many other references. One may deny that Peter was primary, but it takes an amazing ignorance or denial of scripture and history to do so.
I’m new to the ancient forms of the faith but been reading these debated books.
I loved Tobit ! It’s so edifying and I felt the spirit when I read it. Judith, not so much. Felt it was uninspired but I’m no authority on these things.
I have been reading Sirac and it’s inspiring for sure
As with Psalm 22, do you think Jesus was referencing Wisdom 2 and the folly of his Enemies when he says “Father forgive them for they know not what they do.”
Known this for sometime. Glad someone covers it.
It was part of the canon when it was defined at the Councils of Rome, Hippo, and Carthage.
Wait, Joshua Charles has a TH-cam channel? 💕
Wisdom 2 is my favorite chapter in the Old Testament.
Very beautiful, wisdom of God indeed.
I would understand going with the Jewish canon if it were established before Christianity, but the fact that it was decided after the birth of Christianity should make one question why the deuterocanonical books were rejected by the Jews. How could their opposition to the new religion not have influenced which books they decided not to include?
Precisely. It was surreal for the reformers to go to those who demanded Christ's life for a collection of OT books.
The jews didn’t include the apocrypha because they contained a lot of prophetic material that proves Jesus as messiah
Glad you covered this. I also experienced this likewise.
Great video ❤😊
Thank you
Those quotes from Wisdom indeed were refering to Jesus... I was not found on those passages, i confess, i am a recent reconverted from Agnosticism, and this is new to me.
As a Catholic, I kept getting this video recommended in my feed but I kept avoiding it because I read the word Apocrypha and assumed this video and channel was Protestant. Then I noticed apocrypha was in quotations so I clicked on it out of curiosity and witnessed the thoroughly Catholic introduction haha 😂.
Aside from the Messianic prophecy, in my mind the reference in verse chapter 2:10 to the Righteous Poor Man, the widow and the grey hairs of old age perfectly describes the holy Family. Mary was certainly a widow in the end, and Joseph was believed to have been considerably older than Mary. We suspect this as Joseph received messages in dreams. As the Prophet Joel wrote (Joel 2:28): "And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit on all flesh; your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, and your young men shall see visions."
As an aside, Fr. Kenneth Baker, S.J. author of "Inside he Bible" believes that Wisdom of Solomon "may" have been written as late as 50 BC.
Kjv66 is 2nd hand anteChrist book without the Deutero 7books. Book of Wisdom Charter 2 :14-24 filled with messiahnic Prophecy for a Jesus ( talks about Jews,Jesus&Father) if you are a true believer you must have 7books
And...the book of Tobit is St. Paul's "angels unaware!"
I heard Luther kept them in his own copy of the Bible. We prefer to call them "Deuterocanonical Books". Apocryphal books would only include the non-canonical gnostic ones for Catholics.
Joshua TCharles, I have seen how the mercy and grace of God has allowed you to reveal what I myself also experienced in my time with Calvinism. We were misled by the British Bible Societies, and this was a mistake. Because, like you, I realized that the books we commonly call apocryphal were not so for the early Christians, especially the Book of Wisdom, which is clearly a canonical book far from being apocryphal. Just as God revealed to Simon that Jesus was His Son, He has now revealed this important and transcendental truth to you.
Here I want to help you with some verses cited by the first Christians of the first 5 centuries, at least 20 citations from them, taken from the deuterocanonicals. This shows us that Martin Luther, without being part of any Church council, declared the seven deuterocanonical books to be apocryphal. The same Bishop Saint Augustine of Hippo, in the last council, selected 73 books, and for him the deuterocanonicals were canonical, just as you have realized that Wisdom is not apocryphal. I give glory to God, and perhaps this will help you see that only Luther believed this absurdity that they were apocryphal. Here are the citations from the first centuries regarding the deuterocanonicals, always believed by the early Church. I congratulate you for sharing your enlightenment with the other brothers.
Example:
Bring the quotes from at least 20 Church Fathers of the first centuries
Name of the Apostolic Father, year of the letter or book, title of the letter or book, and the quote referencing the deuterocanonicals.
Paragraph with Examples of Early Church Father Citations:
Joshua TCharles, your journey of discovery regarding the deuterocanonical books is truly inspiring and resonates with the experiences of many who have examined the historical evidence. The notion of these books being "apocryphal" is a relatively late development, as we see clear evidence of their use and acceptance by the early Church. Martin Luther’s rejection of these texts stands in stark contrast to the consensus of the first centuries, where these books were not seen as extra-biblical, but as part of the scriptural tradition. As you've eloquently recognized the canonical nature of Wisdom, let us delve into some examples from the early Church Fathers supporting this point of view and the other deuterocanonical books:
Clement of Rome, circa 96 AD, Letter to the Corinthians, Clement quotes from Wisdom 12:12: "Who can say to you, What have you done?" and presents it as authoritative.
Polycarp of Smyrna, circa 110 AD, Letter to the Philippians, This letter alludes to Tobit 4:10, "Almsgiving delivers from death," reflecting a familiar understanding of these texts.
Didache, circa 100-150 AD, Didache, The Didache is a manual of Christian life which shows familiarity with Sirach, quoting phrases and using concepts found in the book. There are a number of passages throughout the Didache that have parallels with Sirach.
Irenaeus of Lyons, circa 180 AD, Against Heresies, Irenaeus uses Baruch 4:36-37 as an authority to refute the Gnostics idea of the physical world.
Tertullian,circa 200 AD, On Modesty, explicitly quotes Wisdom to show its authority
Clement of Alexandria, circa 200 AD, The Instructor, Clement often quotes from Baruch and Wisdom as scripture, showing a high regard for the books. He also mentions Tobit and Judith.
Origen of Alexandria, circa 230 AD, Commentary on Matthew, Origen cites Wisdom 10:4 showing its acceptance as divinely inspired text when mentioning Noah.
Cyprian of Carthage, circa 250 AD, Treatise 1, Cyprian quotes Tobit 12:8, "Prayer is good with fasting, and alms," using it as an authoritative piece of God's teaching.
Hippolytus of Rome, circa 225 AD, Commentary on Daniel, Hippolytus quotes from Susanna as part of the Old Testament Scripture in his commentary.
Athanasius of Alexandria, circa 367 AD, 39th Festal Letter acknowledges the usefulness of several deuterocanonical books, for edification, but places them in a category different than the protocanonical writings.
Hilary of Poitiers, circa 360 AD, Commentary on the Psalms, Hilary quotes and accepts Baruch as part of the prophetic books.
Cyril of Jerusalem, circa 350 AD, Catechetical Lectures, Cyril quotes from Wisdom and other deuterocanonical texts.
Ambrose of Milan, circa 380 AD, On Repentance, Ambrose uses Tobit and Wisdom for instruction, seeing them as part of the inspired scriptures.
Basil of Caesarea, circa 370 AD, Letters, Basil cites the book of Baruch.
Gregory of Nyssa, circa 380 AD, On the Making of Man, Gregory quotes Wisdom as an authoritative text.
John Chrysostom, circa 400 AD, Homilies on Hebrews, John references to the deuterocanonical book of Tobit.
Epiphanius of Salamis, circa 375 AD, Panarion, Epiphanius mentions the book of Judith, in his discussion of the biblical canon.
Augustine of Hippo, circa 400 AD, On Christian Doctrine, Augustine affirms the canonicity of the deuterocanonical books, including Wisdom, and Tobit, as part of the Old Testament canon in the council of Carthage which he attended.
Jerome, circa 400 AD, Against Rufinus, Jerome shows familiarity with Tobit, Judith, Baruch and Wisdom as books included in the Old Testament canon.
Council of Hippo circa 393 AD, This Council, where St. Augustine was involved, officially listed the Deuterocanonical books as part of the Old Testament canon for the church.
These examples showcase that the deuterocanonical books were not peripheral or late additions, but integral parts of the scriptural tradition for centuries, long before the Reformation. These citations of early church fathers highlight the wide acceptance of these texts from the first centuries of Christianity. Your recognition of the canonical value of these books is a return to the authentic, historical understanding of the Christian scriptures.
❤❤❤
The Apocrypha DOES repeat some of the actual Old Testament, so, in that regard, it has SOME truths in it. It ALSO has falsehoods. And once it contains a falsehood, it's no longer the Word of God. It is written AFTER the Old Testament is completed...every prophecy recorded, etc. in the period of Silence.
It's not canon and to pretend otherwise is false teaching...and ADDING to God's Word in this manner comes with a hefty penalty.
I like the old closing music better
*But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.*
How can the Roman Catholics who are ESAU'S seed who God hates, ( Malachi 1:2-3, Romans 9:13) decides what is or isn't the words of the God of Abraham Issac & Jacob?
🙏
Why is the Book of Wisdom not in the Bible?
The Book of Wisdom is not in the Protestant Bible nor the Jewish holy books because it is not perceived to have been inspired by God, but the creation of humankind. The Book of Wisdom is one of the fourteen books of the Apocrypha which were all originally written in Greek and part of the Greek Old Testament.
One of the basic principles of biblical interpretation is the analogia scriptura, the analogy of Scripture--we must compare Scripture with Scripture in order to understand its full and proper sense. Since the Bible doesn't contradict itself, any interpretation of a specific passage that contradicts the general teaching of the Bible is to be rejected.
*But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.*
*Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.*
*But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.*
*And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.*
If you don’t accept the 73 book canon, would that mean your deny tradition? SOLO scriptura? -- and if you deny the 73 book canon, do you deny Jesus’ promise to guide the church into all truths?
There's an online christian ministry that's targeted to evangelize Jews, and ofc they're protestants, and never miss to bash Catholics from time to time. Anyways, they often use Isaiah to convince Jews about this prophecy.
So what does this mean? Not all protestants reject Isaiah as divinely inspired, or what?
Didn’t the Jews reject these books bc of all the prophecies about Our Lord?
Jesus quoted almost exclusively from the Septuagint collection, which contains these books. The BEREANS!!! had the Septuagint collection.
I'm a Catholic. The book of Wisdom was not written centuries before Christ It is dated to the mid first century BC. So more like 50 years before Christ.
Wrong right out of the gate. I don't reject the Apocrypha, I just don't consider it Scripture.
Glory of our lady?.
But Mary is not worshipped in Catholicism?.
22:30 i think you meant Psalm 72.
You said Psalm 73 but started praying Psalm 72 ( unless you were praying from a protestant "bible". If so then I apologize).
+CHRISTVS REX EST 👑
Different manuscripts have different numbering of the Psalms.
The apocryphal books in the Septuagint were in the KJV for hundreds of years. They were removed in the 1880s. It was very controversial.
It is not a sin to read the apocryphal books. Protestants can read them. I don't care if those books are in my Bible or not. Those books don't make a person "not protestant."
How many Protestants alive today were alive in the 1880s? None. Few Protestants have read those books. They reject them because they are told to.
There's no poison in the apocryphal books that will suddenly make you a Roman Catholic.
Thanks
Its all very well having a prophecy that is accurate in a book. And surely, that had a spiritual source. But the rest of the book of Wisdom has some weird ideas. These ideas have never grown into any doctrine but, in the wrong hands, they could. That's why the book was rejected.
Ecclesiasticus is even worse. It says you should divorce your wife if she nags too much and that you should not fear death because you won't be judged among other peculiar sayings. Its very obviously human. Its like a father's advice to his son. But scripture? No way!
Lots of Christians have prophesied things throughout the ages that came true. Must their writings now become part of the new testament?
The Jews had already rejected these books. Why should Christians now accept them?
These arguments about the cannon go on and on. But the books of the bible were established centuries ago for very good reasons by the fathers of our faith. I really think it is a bad idea to continually buck up against this pillar of truth.
Catholic
To claim what is "scripture" I believe a large part is man made, so imo you need way better reasons to deny reading these books, it's just egotistical to not
There are prophecies that have and will occur outside of canonized scripture. That does not make anything part of canonized scripture.
Of course, but the Church ruled on both testaments. One single man disagreed.
The history of protestantism leaves one good lesson: Do not pay attention to protestants when they speak about the Canon, because protestantism began with a clear attack against the canon of the Bible: luther took out of the Bible 7 Books of the OT and 4 of the NT and other protestant follow him, read "The Canon of the NT" by protestant NT Scholar Bruce Metzger for a list of early protestants reformers who rejected Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, Jude and Revelation as God´s Word and called or treat them "apocrypha". This is why the Council of Trent in 1546 had to teach once again what is the real canon of the Bible.
Book of Isaiah is quoted in gospel more than the book of wisdom. It's not a major evidence of the whole apocryphal writings
I listened to Joshua's presentation and how many times Isiah is quoted relative to Wisdom is the not the point I think he was trying to make. I think you would acknowledge that in the 39 book OT Canon protestants hold to (Catholics hold those same 39 as canonical as well) that Judges, Ruth, Ezra, Esther, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Lamentations, Obadiah, Jonah, and Zephaniah are never directly quoted. Some are alluded to clearly, the sign of Jonah is clearly referencing the book of Jonah by Christ in MT 16:4 but at the same time some of those are not even alluded to and 2 (Esther and Song of Songs) do not even mention God.
Cheers.
@PalermoTrapani l think the Jewish rabbi's have different view of their scripture, especially Isaiah chapter 53, again they consider the Masoretic text more than the Septuagint. The myth of the 70 or 72 Jewish scholars in Alexandria with same results is far fetched. The old testament writings are a mix of languages from other sources besides the Hebrew,which in Moses day was so different from the Masoretic text having vowel pointing. As apostle Paul said himself,the letter killeth,the spirit giveth Life, you can debate over which is the best transliteration,yet what does it prove??, jesus on the road to Emmaus had to explain that the scripture was fulfilled in him, Peter in Matthew chapter 16, never got his revelation from his biblical knowledge or jesus in the flesh. Jesus said clearly his father in heaven revealed him,John the baptist had same revelation prior to Peter.. . lastly l think it's about predestination of God himself who gave jesus his disciples, jesus said same in gospel of John chapter 17. Jesus said also to his disciples, l have chosen you,not you choose me,that's very revealing with John gospel chapter 17.
@@frederickanderson1860 No the Masoretic text was put together well after the time of Christ and the early Church. The Apostles and the Christians considered the LXX more important as the OT quotes cited in the NT are about 75% from the LXX, Saint Paul it is like 95% of the time (13 or 14 of the 27 books in the NT canon are attributed to Saint Paul).
Cheers.
@PalermoTrapani yes but again predestination is the key to salvation, and am not a Calvinist or hyper Calvinist. Gospel of John chapter 17 jesus plainly states his father for choosing his disciples, and that they always acknowledge that to be one,as he and his father are one. The antichrist spirit is against the father and son.
@@frederickanderson1860 Predestination is orthodox if not kept in isolation and not put against God's Will which is perfect thus includes what God wills positively and what is in His permissive will, His perfect foreknowledge and also man's free response to God's invitation of Grace and in no circumstances can one hold to any idea that God eternally decrees someone (predestines) them to hell.
What if I told you there’s a prophecy that singles out Papal Rome as the Antichrist.
We would dismiss it as false, even blasphemous.
@@po18guy-s4sThat would be a valid response. But as a seeker of truth, it would be worth reading into it. Look at what the Bible says. And then decide.
@@po18guy-s4s You would dismiss what the Bible says?
I’d say it is a false prophecy made by twisted interpretation of a disturbed mind, among many invented by the devil - the father of lies and his soldiers. Protestantism has so many of those among its representatives, unfortunately.
Its not for us to decide. Its the question of authorship and in general its a jewish privilege.
Why is it a Jewish privilege to decide what books are in the Christian Scriptures?
RATHER! It is a question of inspiration and content.
Why is it a Jewish privilege?
Why is it their privilege?
@@jomidiam 1st the jew than the gentile
The Protestant biblical canon is a 2nd century (at the earliest) anti-Christian Jewish canon that rejected the Deuteros simultaneously with and along with the New Testament: "The Gospels and heretical books do not defile the hands. The books of Ben Sira [Sirach] and all other books written from then on do not defile the hands." - Tosefta Yadayim 2
Kjv66 is a 2nd anti Anti Christ Jewish book.